netdev - Re: Potential regression/bug in net/mlx5 driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZECKn2WwX22wrsMt@x130>
Date:   Wed, 19 Apr 2023 17:43:11 -0700
From:   Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
        Shay Drory <shayd@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        selinux@...r.kernel.org, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: Potential regression/bug in net/mlx5 driver

On 17 Apr 08:38, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 21:40:35 -0700 Saeed Mahameed wrote:
>> >What do we do now, tho? If the main side effect of a revert is that
>> >users of a newfangled device with an order of magnitude lower
>> >deployment continue to see a warning/error in the logs - I'm leaning
>> >towards applying it :(
>>
>> I tend to agree with you but let me check with the FW architect what he has
>> to offer, either we provide a FW version check or another more accurate
>> FW cap test that could solve the issue for everyone. If I don't come up with
>> a solution by next Wednesday I will repost your revert in my next net PR
>> on Wednesday. You can mark it awaiting-upstream for now, if that works for
>> you.
>
>OK, sounds good.


So I checked with Arch and we agreed that the only devices that need to
expose this management PF are Bluefield chips, which have dedicated device
IDs, and newer than the affected FW, so we can fix this by making the check
more strict by testing device IDs as well.

I will provide a patch by tomorrow, will let Paul test it first.